Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; T 5, by Henry James Pye. Prologue by William Sotheby; Epilogue by John Taylor (see text)]: With new Dresses and Decorations. "From the first drawing up of the curtain, till its final fall, we could not discover one single flight of fancy, one solitary scene of woe...It is but justice to add that for a first night the performers, with the exception of Barrymore, were very perfect in their respective parts [and see 27 Jan.]" (Dramatic Censor, I, 175, 181). Receipts: #309 13s. (246.4.6; 61.0.6; 2.8.0)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Luttrell dated his copy of the separately-printed Prologue and Epilogue 5 April 1684 (J. W. Dodds, Thomas Southerne, p. 48). Very probably the play first appeared during the week of 31 March-5 April, immediately following Easter. The Prologue and Epilogue are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 191-94. This may have been the last new role William Smith undertook for some years; see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, 1, 78-79, for the incident which prompted Smith's leaving the stage for awhile. One song, I never saw a face till now, with music by Captain Pack, is in The Theater of Music, the First Book, 1685; and another, O why did e'er my thoughts aspire, the music by R. King, is in the same collection. A third song, See how fair Corinna lies, the music by Captain Pack, is in A Collection of Twenty-Four Songs, 1685

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of performance is uncertain. The play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 15 Feb. 1663@4, and its publication noted in The Newes, 3 March 1663@4. Katherine Philips, writing from Cardigan, Wales to Lady Temple in London, 24 Jan. 1663@4: I beleive er'e this you have seen the new Pompey either acted or written & then will repent your partiallity to ye other, but I wonder much what preparations for it could prejudice Will Davenant when I heare they acted in English habits, & yt so aprope yt Caesar was sent in with his feather & Muff, till he was hiss'd off ye Stage & for ye Scenes I see not where they could place any yt are very extra-ordinary, but if this play hath not diverted ye Cittizens wives enough Sr W: D: will make amends, for they say Harry ye 8th & some later ones are little better then Puppett-plays. I understand ye confederate-translators are now upon Heraclius, & I am contented yt Sr Tho. Clarges (who hath done that last yeare) should adorn their triumph in it, as I have done in Pompey (Harvard Theatre Collection)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: In haste to carry my wife to see the new play I saw yesterday, she not knowing it. But there, contrary to expectation, find The Silent Woman. However in; and there Knipp come into the pit...[and] tells me the King was so angry at the liberty taken by Lacy's part to abuse him to his face, that he commanded they should act no more, till Moone [Mohun] went and got leave for them to act again, but not this play. The King mighty angry; and it was better indeed, but very true and witty. I never was more taken with a play than I am with this "Silent Woman," as old as it is, and as often as I have seen it. There is more wit in it than goes to ten new plays. Nathaniel Wanby, Coventry, 1667: We have known in our time that the Silent Woman hath had the loud applause of a whole theatre (BM Harleian MS. 6430, p.23)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Being full of my desire of seeing my Lord Orrery's new play this afternoon at the King's house, The Black Prince, the first time it is acted; where though we come by two o'clock, yet there was no room in the pit, but we were forced to go into one of the upper boxes, at 4s. a piece, which is the first time I ever sat in a box in my life. And in the same box come, by and by, behind me, my Lord Barkeley and his lady; but I did not turn my face to them to be known, so that I was excused from giving them my seat; and this pleasure I had, that from this place the scenes do appear very fine indeed, and much better than in the pit. The house infinite full, and the King and Duke of York was there. By and by the play begun, and in it nothing Particular but a very fine dance for variety of figures, but a little too long. But, as to the contrivance, and all that was witty (which, indeed, was much, and very witty), was almost the same that had been in his two former plays of Henry the 5th and Mustapha, and the same points and turns of wit in both, and in this very same play often repeated, but in excellent language, and were so excellent that the whole house was mightily pleased with it all along till towards the end he comes to discover the chief of the plot of the play by the reading of a long letter, which was so long and some things (the people being set already to think too long) so unnecessary that they frequently begun to laugh, and to hiss twenty times, that, had it not been for the King's being there, they had certainly hissed it off the stage. But I must confess that, as my Lord Barkeley says behind me, the having of that long letter was a thing so absurd, that he could not imagine how a man of his parts could possibly fall into it; or, if he did, if he had but let any friend read it, the friend would have told him of it; and, I must confess, it is one of the most remarkable instances that ever I did or expect to meet with in my life of a wise man's not being wise at all times, and in all things, for nothing could be more ridiculous than this, though the letter of itself at another time would be thought an excellent letter, and indeed an excellent Romance, but at the end of the play, when every body was weary of sitting, and were already possessed with the effect of the whole letter, to trouble them with a letter a quarter of an hour long was a most absurd thing. After the play done, and nothing pleasing them from the time of the letter to the end of the play, people being put into a bad humour of disliking (which is another thing worth the noting), I home by coach, and could not forbear laughing almost all the way home, and all the evening to my going to bed, at the ridiculousness of the letter, and the more because my wife was angry with me, and the world, for laughing, because the King was there, though she cannot defend the length of the letter

Event Comment: Benefit for Sparks. Afterpiece: A farce never perform'd before. [Possibly Thomas Sheridan's The Brave Irishman, but see Ten English Farces, Leo Hughes and A. H. Scouten (Austin, Texas, 1948), pp. 221 ff.] Last time of the company's performing till the holidays

Event Comment: Benefit for Miss Macklin. Last time of performing till the Holidays. Part of Pit laid into Boxes. Receipts: #330 (Cross)

Event Comment: Last time of performing the afterpiece till 31 March

Event Comment: Benefit for Grimaldi (ballet master) and Moody. House charges #64 17s. [Profits to Moody and Grimaldi #5 9s. plus tickets.] Farce not acted in 3 years. [See 12 April 1764.] At 9 got to Drury Lane, could not get in at ye left side of ye Pit or first Gallery. After waiting till the play was over at the other door of ye Pit, got in and saw the Vintage, by Mrs King and Sg Grimaldi (whose benefit and Mr Moody's it was). He dances much better than the fellow who usually dances that dance. My intention in going was to see the F, of the Register Office, not acted these 3 years. [All characters done well] such characters are ye effects of our ill-cemented union (Neville MS Diary). Receipts: #70 6s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Read the principal parts of Much Ado About Nothing. Dined at St Clements Chop House, entered into a political conversation with a young gentleman, which prevented me from getting into the Pit till 5 o'clock. Was so squeez'd I could scarcely use my glass. [Lists parts.] The play was concluded by Comic Dance by the characters. How well and with what Agility Garrick dances (Neville MS Diary)

Event Comment: HHopkins MS Memorandum Book: Wrote to Mr Barry to know when they could play. Receiv'd a letter from him on Monday, desiring they might be excus'd playing till Saturday sennight, as they were both ill. Wrote to him the same day desiring they would send me word what play they would chuse to appear in, & when they would rehearse. Rec'd a letter on Thursday the 28th that the soonest they could appear would be the latter end of the next week. They play King Lear on Sat. 7 Oct

Event Comment: Fanny first time Miss P. Hopkins-very well and great applause (Hopkins Diary). The altered Comedy of Old City Manners, which was to have been performed this evening, for the author, is oblig'd to be deferr'd till Monday next on account of Mr Dodd's illness, when tickets deliver'd for this night will be taken. Receipts: #154 17s. 6d. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Alexander the Great? [announced on playbill of 4 Nov.] is obliged to be deferred. [The playbill lists Mrs Yates as Lady Townly, but see following note. Miss Younge's name appears in all subsequent playbills, except on 19 Dec.] Alexander was advertised for this Night, but Lacy being hoarse, who was to have played Alexander, it was obliged to be deferred, and this Play substituted. It was between eleven and twelve o'clock at (Night) before we got it settled. Mr. Sheridan ordered me not to send to Mrs. Yates about (it) till the Morning. About eight o'clock I sent her Notice that the Provoked Husband was to be performed at Night. A little after nine, she sent Word by her Niece that she was never so ill treated in her life, that she was never before asked to play on the fifth of November [which day was traditionally set aside for the acting of Tamerlane], that she would not play Lady Townly that Night, nor would she play any more; and if she had an Inclination to play, she had no Cloaths ready to play it in; and sent back the Part of Semiramis in a new Tragedy that was preparing [see 16 Nov., 14 Dec.]. I got Miss Younge to do Lady Townly, and an Apology was made by Packer that Mrs Yates having refused this Morning to do Lady Townly, Miss Younge at a Minutes' Notice undertook to do it. Miss Younge was much applauded and Yates had a few hisses (Hopkins Diary). Receipts: #179 11s. 6d

Event Comment: [Extra night] By Permission [of the Lord Chamberlain]. Benefit for Mrs Lisley, late Miss Barsanti. T. Davis's benefit, which was intended for Tuesday next, is obliged to be deferred till a Future Day, of which Proper Notice will be given. [Digges's 1st recorded appearance as Lord Townly was at Edinburgh, 6 Mar. 1756.

Event Comment: The Winter's Tale [announced on playbill of 18 Nov.] is unavoidably obliged to be deferred till to-morrow. Receipts: # 82 1s. (59.14.0; 21.8.6; 0.18.6)

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Not acted these 3 years. On account of the Indisposition of Master Elliot the new Musical Entertainment of The Chimney Corner [advertised on playbill of 30 Sept.] is deferred till Saturday next. Receipts: #303 18s. (214.1; 89.4; 0.13)

Event Comment: The Naval Pillar [advertised on playbill of 14 Oct., is] obliged, on account of Incledon's severe Hoarseness, to be postponed till Next Week. Afterpiece: By permission of the Proprietors of Drury Lane Theatre. Receipts: #263 4s. 6d. (253.3.6; 10.1.0)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: Away to my wife at the Duke of York's house, in the pit, and so left her; and to Mrs Pierce, and took her and her cozen Corbet, Knepp and little James, and brought them to the Duke's house; and, the house being full, was forced to carry them to a box, which did cost me 20s., besides oranges, which troubled me, though their company did please me. Thence, after the play, stayed till Harris was undressed, there being acted The Tempest, and so he withall, all by coach, home

Event Comment: Mainpiece: By Desire. The Play of As You Like It designed for tomorrow, for the Benefit of a Distress'd Family, is oblig'd, on account of the Ball at the Haymarket, to be deferr'd till farther notice (playbill). Receipts: #200 (Cross)

Event Comment: [As afterpiece Public Advertiser announces The Rival Candidates, but see Hopkins Diary, 12 Oct.] The Managers met again to-day, but nothing settled. Hamlet was given out. I saw Mr Sheridan, he told me that Mr Lacy and he had agreed that no Play should be given out, nor any Bills put up, till they had settled this Affair, which was to be done to-Morrow at Mr Wallis's (the Attorney's) where they were all to dine. I waited on Mr Lacy, who agreed to the same, and no Bills or Paragraph were sent to the Papers. All the Business of the Theatre is at a Stand, and no Rehearsal called. Wed. 16th--Mr Sheridan, Dr Ford and Mr Linley dined today by Appointment with Mr Wallis where Mr Lacy was to have met them; about four o'clock he sent a verbal Message that he could not come to Dinner, but would wait upon them in the Evening, and about nine o'clock he came, and everything was settled to the Satisfaction (of them all) and a Paragraph sent to the Papers, and the Hypocrite and Christmas Tale was advertised for Friday, but no Play was to be done on Thursday--Covent Garden did not play on Friday (Hopkins Diary). Public Advertiser, 16 Oct., summarizes the proprietors' dispute: the Drury Lane patent had been purchased [in 1747] by David Garrick and James Lacy. On his death Lacy had devised his half-share to his son, Willoughby Lacy; on his retirement from the stage Garrick had sold his half-share to Sheridan, Ford and Linley. The original agreement between Garrick and Lacy, as recited in a document retained by the attorney Albany Wallis was that, in case of the sale of either share of the patent, or any part of either share, the seller was obligated to offer the first refusal to purchase to the other partner, and that this was to be done only when the theatre was closed for the summer. In selling one half of his share to Robert Langford and to Edward Thompson, Willoughby Lacy was--so argued his three partners--acting illegally: he had not offered to them the first refusal, and he was negotiating the sale at a time when the theatre was open. Public Advertiser, 17 Oct.. prints a statement from Lacy saying that he did not feel himself bound by the original agreement between his father and Garrick, but that, in the interest of the business of the theatre, he had asked Langford and Thompson to withdraw their claim to partnership, to which request they had acceded. Receipts: #130 9s. 6d

Event Comment: The King's Company. There is uncertainty as to the date of the first performance, but in A Bibliography of John Dryden, p. 193, Macdonald cites as evidence for this date, Wood's Ath. Ox., IV, 209. The play was certainly first acted not later than this month, because John Evelyn saw it on 14 Dec. 1671. For further details, see 14 Dec. 1671

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not certain. This performance is known from an entry in the Newdigate newsletters, which also states that Rollo was to be acted on the following Monday. If this statement is accurate, the performance of The Loyal Brother on 4 Feb. 1681@2 may be the third night rather than the opening performance. Newdigate newsletters, 4 Feb. 1681@2: On Monday morn [the Moorish Ambassador] & ye Comers meet to conclude ye treaty and in ye afternoon goes to see Rollo D. of Normandy at ye Ks playhouse wre ye K was this afternoon to see ye new play calld ye Loyall brothr (Wilson, More Theater Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 59). The Prologue and Epilogue were printed separately and have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 70-72. Luttrell acquired his copies (Huntington Library) on 7 Feb. 1681@2. In The Life of John Dryden (Chapel Hill, 1961), Charles E. Ward believes (pp. 166, 355) that The Loyal Brother was first acted in the autumn of 1681; but the entry in the Newdigate newsletters seems to make February 1682 the more probable time

Event Comment: The Doors to be opened at 5:15. To begin at 6:15 [see 3 May 1790]. Paid Say for Tallow Candles last Season #88 6s. 3d. "That beautiful and best drawn character that the world ever saw, Sir John Falstaff, was mangled by Ryder. He substitutes savageness to jollity, and stiff mimicry to the natural debauchery that should hang as easily on Sir John as the Roomy mantle he moves in...Lewis gave us more the manner of the pretty man of fashion than of a dissipated hero" (Prompter, 4 Nov.). Receipts: #168 1s. 6d. (164.12.6; 3.9.0)

Event Comment: 2nd piece (1st time; C 3, by John O'Keeffe. Prologue by George Colman, ynger (see text)]: With new Scenes, Dresses and Decorations. Salary list (Enthoven Collection): Paid O'Keeffe for London Hermit #108 15s. Morning Chronicle, 17 July 1793: This Day is published The London Hermit (1s. 6d.)